I have a Remington 700 bdl in .222 cal..The date on the barrel is P J which I beleave to be June 1962 which is the first year the .222 was made with a 20" barrel.There is no warning on the barrel and I think they started doing that in about 1984. My problem is there is no front sight on the barrel are holes for one. I am told that Remington did not make a .222 that year except in 20" so can anyone tell me if this rifle is original. Thanks Wayne the serial # is 11,2xx

Not aware Remington Arms making a 20" barrel for their Model 700 series. Also ALL their Model 700 rifles came with open sights at that time. Sounds like the former owner had the barrel cut & recrowned to 20" to me.

Welcome to the forum. Rules are to join in and have fun and play nicely with the rest of us kids.

Couldn't tell from your phrasing whether the front sight screw hole is there or not?

I can verify the P letter is for June, but the letter J has repeated itself and is 1940,1962, or 1989. You can safely eliminate 1940, as that precedes the introductions of both .222 Remington and the model 700. So, you have to choose between 1962 and 1989.

That serial number in the 11 thousand range strikes me as just way too low to be 1989. I think that even in the 70's there was a preceding letter followed by a number in the millions. But, serial numbers can be funny as some manufacturers set aside or reserve some for special issue, so call Remington customer service and ask. They used to have a place on their web site saying you could write with the date code letters and the serial number and they would give you the approximate date of manufacture. I don't see that now, offhand, but I'll bet customer service can tell you what department to contact if they don't have the answer themselves. 1-800-243-9700.

"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley

Just got of the phone with remington they are a helpful bunch. He said the rifle was made in 1962 and they just came in 20" until 1964. He said he could not tell me why no front sight but the rifle was original. It has a weaver 4x scope on it I guess maybe that is the way it came, anyway thanks for your help, till next time Wayne

Just got of the phone with remington they are a helpful bunch. He said the rifle was made in 1962 and they just came in 20" until 1964. He said he could not tell me why no front sight but the rifle was original. It has a weaver 4x scope on it I guess maybe that is the way it came, anyway thanks for your help, till next time Wayne

Your 700 Remington must be a custom run. I looked through a couple of gun collection books and no where does it mention a 20" barrel for the 700. You mentioned that it had no front sight; does it have holes for a rear sight? Sounds like the person you spoke to had it confused with their Model 660 which did have a 20" barrel. The Remington Model 700's came with 22" or 24" barrels, atleast that is the inforrmation I found on the 700. Regardless it sound like you have a nice rifle.

I keep going back and reading in the priceing blue book and if you go to remington 700 BDL it says that in 1962 and 1963 the .222 came standard in 20" with several other cal. Then they went to a 22" and 24" barrel in 1964. I guess it really does not matter but things like this bug me, something to talk about anyway. Someboby has to have one are knows someone that has one.

I keep going back and reading in the priceing blue book and if you go to remington 700 BDL it says that in 1962 and 1963 the .222 came standard in 20" with several other cal. Then they went to a 22" and 24" barrel in 1964. I guess it really does not matter but things like this bug me, something to talk about anyway. Someboby has to have one are knows someone that has one.

I think just about everyone that wanted a 222 picked one up before Rem dropped the 722 in 1962 and when they started making the Model 700 you could get the 222mag with a longer barrel.

Hard to say what Remington was doing back then. Sound like you got a nice rifle.

I keep going back and reading in the priceing blue book and if you go to remington 700 BDL it says that in 1962 and 1963 the .222 came standard in 20" with several other cal. Then they went to a 22" and 24" barrel in 1964. I guess it really does not matter but things like this bug me, something to talk about anyway. Someboby has to have one are knows someone that has one.

I looked at another one of my "Gun Books" and found that Remington DID make a 20" barrel (With or without Open Sights) in the "C" custom model 700's in .222 Rem. & other calibers. So your particular 700 is or must be one of Remington's custom runs of Model 700's. Sounds like this rifle should be of collectable value.

I love the triple deuce. It is right there w/ the 22Hornet, 257Rbts, 270, 30/06, 300 & 375 H&H as all time classics. I can't contribute to the speculation about the history of your gun but I wish I owned it.

14" twist is typical in the .222. They shoot bullets with flat bases up to 55-60 grains or so, though it depends on the length of the nose design. At 100 yards my Remington 600 in .222 won't shoot the 52 grain boattail Sierra MatchKing nearly as well as it does the 53 grain Sierra flat base MatchKing. Neither are unstable, but the boattail is clearly less stable and needs more distance to start looking good.

"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley

Gents, the 700 standard length in 62-63 was 20 inches for the 222 and several other calibers. I had a 243 and now have a 6mm. Look in the Blue Book of Gun Values or better yet Lacy's book on the Remington 700. The latter is the definitive reference for Remington collectors

Why the barrel has no screw holes for sights I don't know except that Remingtons custom shop was more flexible on special orders in that day. Lacys book indicates you could get rifles with or w/0 barrel sights.

Carbines as some call them are highly collectable especially the BDL or in 222 mag and 280. These command considerable premiums as they are quite rare. A common caliber such as the 30-06 still commands a 20 percent premium

When Remiington introduced the Model 700, all they made were 20 inch barrels. I bought mine in 62 it is 20 inches, it has a ramp from sight that is sweated on with a dovetail sight in the ramp, brass bead on the ft sight. Rear is a metal open sight, very similiar to the plastic one they supply today. Mine is and ADL with pressed checkering no factory sling swivels, and a solid wood floor plate. the trigger guard is alloy. Over all a nice gun that I bought new for $67. It shot sub MOA 10 shot groups. Last year the barrel was shot out and I rebarreled it.

At the time in 1962, Remington had done some testing and determined that there really was no valid purpose for barrels over 20 inches in a HUNTING Rifle. They were probably true then and now. I rebarreled it witha heavy, no sight 28 inch flutted barrel. That 20 inch barrel was every bit as good, IMO.

When Remiington introduced the Model 700, all they made were 20 inch barrels. I bought mine in 62 it is 20 inches, it has a ramp from sight that is sweated on with a dovetail sight in the ramp, brass bead on the ft sight. Rear is a metal open sight, very similiar to the plastic one they supply today. Mine is and ADL with pressed checkering no factory sling swivels, and a solid wood floor plate. the trigger guard is alloy. Over all a nice gun that I bought new for $67. It shot sub MOA 10 shot groups. Last year the barrel was shot out and I rebarreled it.

At the time in 1962, Remington had done some testing and determined that there really was no valid purpose for barrels over 20 inches in a HUNTING Rifle. They were probably true then and now. I rebarreled it witha heavy, no sight 28 inch flutted barrel. That 20 inch barrel was every bit as good, IMO.